How do PR firms typically handle Wikipedia and what goes wrong?

PR firms attempting Wikipedia work for clients without specialized practice tend to make the same recognizable mistakes. They edit the article directly without disclosing the client relationship, which violates the terms of use and gets caught when the community identifies the pattern. They use promotional language – subjective adjectives, marketing framing, undue emphasis on awards – which gets reverted within hours. They treat the Talk page as a publicity venue rather than a community discussion, posting requests that read like press releases rather than policy-grounded proposals. They confront editors who push back, accusing them of bias rather than engaging with their objections. And they fail to source the proposed content adequately, leaning on the client’s own materials rather than independent reliable sources. Several major global PR firms refer Wikipedia work to us specifically because their own staff has been bruised by trying to do it directly.